Editorial: The Erasure of Memory —Wells, Howard,.silent…. The Celebration’s Callous Disregard for Sacred Legacies

Editorial: The Erasure of Memory — The Celebration’s Callous Disregard for Sacred Legacies

Not even pleas to Warren Wells and Jeffery Howard on his own website matter. The topic, the removal of memorial stones is not merely an act of demolition; it is a violent erasure of history, community, and the bonds that tie people to place. The recent revelations about the fate of the Calsonic walkway bricks—engraved with the names of horses and owners, once a testament to shared heritage—expose a disturbing pattern of institutional arrogance. The Celebration board’s treatment of these memorials mirrors a broader societal failure to honor the sacredness of collective memory, echoing controversies like Calgary’s Olympic Plaza brick removal . Here, too, we see a bureaucracy prioritizing expediency over empathy, dismissing the emotional weight of artifacts that embody irreplaceable stories.

 A Legacy Dumped Like Trash

Reports confirm that the  (Cooper Steel) Calsonic bricks, meant to immortalize contributions to equestrian culture, were found “piled behind one of the old barns” in a state of neglect [citation:User Posts]. This disrespect mirrors Calgary’s initial plan to destroy 33,000 Olympic Plaza bricks—until public outrage forced accountability . The Celebration board’s indifference is not just negligence; it is a betrayal of trust. These bricks were purchased as acts of pride and participation, much like Calgary’s $19.88 Olympic bricks, which donors fought to reclaim as fragments of personal and civic identity . To discard them without consultation is to declare that community history is disposable.

Institutional Arrogance Masquerading as Progress

The Celebration board’s dismissive attitude—labeled “arrogant” by critics—reflects a troubling trend. In Calgary, officials initially claimed salvaging bricks was “not feasible” due to cost and logistics, only to reverse course under public pressure 414. Similarly, the Celebration’s failure to communicate plans for the bricks or offer retrieval options reeks of contempt for stakeholders. When Calgary faced backlash, they launched a registration system, digital scans, and pickup days 414. Why has no such effort been made here? The board’s silence suggests a belief that progress justifies erasing the past—a philosophy as dangerous as it is shortsighted.

The Hypocrisy of “Preservation” Without Participation

The Celebration board’s actions starkly contrast with global efforts to balance modernization and memory. The Catholic Church’s Jubilee 2025, for instance, emphasizes pilgrimages to sacred sites and indulgences tied to physical relics, recognizing that tangible symbols anchor spiritual and communal identity 713. Even secular projects like Calgary’s plaza redesign incorporated digital archives to preserve brick inscriptions 14. Yet the Celebration board offers no alternatives—no scans, no memorial walls, no acknowledgment. This is not preservation; it is obliteration.

A Demand for Accountability

The public outcry in Calgary forced transparency: 30% of requested bricks were unsalvageable, but 70% were returned 2. The Celebration board must adopt similar accountability. Who decided the bricks were expendable? Why were donors not notified? Why are there no plans to repurpose or honor these artifacts? The board’s lack of decency—to quote B. Mohon—is a failure of leadership. Communities deserve better than bureaucratic stonewalling.

The Sacred Is Not Negotiable

Memorial stones are not pavement; they are promises. To treat them as rubble is to devalue the humanity they represent. The Celebration board must apologize, retrieve salvageable bricks, and create a permanent memorial. If Calgary could navigate this with imperfect solutions, so can they. History is not a burden—it is the foundation upon which futures are built.

The Calsonic walkway bricks are more than stones; they are stories. The Celebration board’s policy is a stark reminder that without vigilance, memory becomes collateral damage in the rush toward “renewal.” Let this be a rallying cry: progress without preservation is no progress at all.